Templeton Global Bond (TPINX) was one of the premier funds in the World Bond category years ago.
TPINX was different from most World Bond funds due to substantial emerging markets exposure and widespread currency bets. The fund generated top 1% / top 2% category returns for the respective 10 Yr and 15 Yr trailing periods as of 01-31-16. Michael Hasenstab (M* 2010 Fixed-Income Manager of the Year) started co-managing TPINX on 12/31/2001.
Templeton Global Income (GIM) was the CEF version of TPINX.
I purchased GIM in late 2013.
GIM was trading at an attractive discount and it had a lower expense ratio than TPINX.
Unfortunately, the discount widened and Mr. Hasenstab lost his mojo.
I sold the CEF approximately five years later booking a tiny profit.

As JonGaltIII observed, "Content is king".
Many years ago, when Netflix had the option of subscribing via DVDs, we were subscribers because of the huge variety and depth of content, much of which was not "mainstream". When Netflix went streaming-only, we dropped the subscription because we didn't do streaming at that time.
Last year we again subscribed to Netflix, hoping to resume viewing content which interests us. We cancelled after one month: nothing that Netflix now offers is of the slightest interest to us as viewers.
I completely understand that our viewing interests are hardly universal, and that Netflix is going for the mass audience. Nonetheless, I would think that the costs of content delivered via streaming would be significantly less than via mailed DVDs. The fact that content that we would happily pay for is no longer available suggests that Netflix management simply made a decision to ignore a certain segment of the potential market.
After cancellation they bombarded us with repeated offers for renewal. However, at no time did they bother to inquire as to why we had cancelled. Literally, they don't have a clue.

According to the proxy filing: "In contrast, the nominees nominated by Saba have limited (if any) experience with closed-end funds or global bond strategies." While it may be true regarding global bond strategies, Saba has invested in and been an activist in closed-end funds for many years. The idea that it doesn't have experience dealing with closed-end funds is misleading.

Like YBB I also held GIM and TGBAX off/on for years during Hassenstab's 'golden time.' In addition to the Ukranian bonds that IIRC blew up in his face a few years ago (at the time he had a reputation for diving into risky areas and winning) I lost interest in the fund due to performance and b/c Hassenstab was entering 'rock-star' status in the media, which to me is an instant turnoff when it comes to investing.
On a side note, that Franklin statement you posted is shrill, whiny, fear-mongering, and imo inappropriately worded ... it's the kind of statement I'd expect to hear from an Elon Musk, frankly.

Now I have a non-linkable "proof" based on checking numbers on our OWN tax returns and what was mentioned in our SSA "DETERMINATION letters" (received typically in November/December) that it is like the 1st FORMULA. So, the SSA takes the AGI from the 1040 of 1-2 years ago (that includes only the TAXABLE Social Security payments) and adds TAX-EXEMPT interest to get MAGI for IRMAA. The Determination letter mentioned those 2 numbers separately and the total and said that the IRS provided them to the SSA. Specifically, the untaxed portion of the Social Security payment was NOT added to MAGI for IRMAA.
The 2nd formula can also be found quickly on web search but it is used for other things, NOT Medicare IRMAA. But misleading statements can be found on the web.

@chinfist, it is a free article from the WSJ so anyone should be able to read it. Anyway the article does elaborate more.
"Several million workers who dropped out of the U.S. workforce during the Covid-19 pandemic plan to stay out indefinitely because of persistent illness fears or physical impairments, potentially exacerbating the labor shortage for years, new research shows.
About three million workforce dropouts say they don’t plan to return to pre-Covid activities—whether that includes going to work, shopping in person or dining out—even after the pandemic ends, according to a monthly survey conducted over the past year by a team of researchers. The workforce dropouts tend to be women, lack a college degree and have worked in low-paying fields."

That is the only part of the article that can be read unless one subscribes. I read that part. My questions pertained to if they are not working, where are they getting money in order to pay the rent/mortgage, food, etc. Does the article address this?
Edit: it looks like you can read it if you register, without having to subscribe.

Noted, but...
Not sure what you think are disclaimers in my posts, but as they say, it is what it is. No need to point them out.
It's my style, borne out of 30+ years of writing/reviewing audit reports for the feds and senior management. FWIW, we bean counters tend to cover our arses when possible, and when appropriate, my favorite, being "sufficiently vague." The latter of which is a true art form in the bizness, routinely employed by several of my staffers, and something I always aspired to be never quite achieved.

@BenWP- Thanks for your comments. We have subscribed to the print edition of the WSJ for many years because of their reporting- most certainly not because of their editorial garbage. Additionally, we subscribe to the print editions of The Economist and The Atlantic, as well as the internet versions of the NY Times, The Washington Post and The Guardian, so we have a pretty good view on tendencies towards reporting bias.
As a prime example of reporting bias, I would note that we also have subscribed to the San Francisco Chronicle for over fifty years. At one time it was actually a decent newspaper. In the past few years it's reporting has deteriorated to little more than a totally predictable "progressive" distortion of reality. The main reason that we maintain the subscription is to read the comics section.
I come from a strong Union family, and in fact was myself a Union steward for a number of years, so my natural bias is obviously towards “left-leaning” perspectives, and I don't regard either of the terms "left-leaning" or "right-leaning" as pejorative. There most definitely is a "left-wing" and a "right-wing", and to pretend otherwise is to be blind to reality.
Nonetheless, I do not want or appreciate significant bias in my news reports. The reason that we subscribe to this spread of news resources is to allow comparison of reported information.
I must respectfully disagree with your opinion of the WSJ. By and large we have found their reporting to be factual, reasonably neutral, and generally in accordance with other decent sources. As you note, any news operation has to choose what events to cover, and with respect to the WSJ it's hard to know if editorial bias influences that. It is true that the WSJ does not always choose the same event overage as The Washington Post, but it's also very true that WaPo is hardly without a "left-leaning" bias of it's own.
One tries to distill something close to the truth by obtaining input from a variety of sources. No one of them is perfect, by any means.

@stillers, If I understood your post correctly, I think you are not suggesting investors to now get into FFGCX. I think your only suggestion is to get into "ST CD/TNotes ladder (6 mos - 2-yrs, the latter being the sweet spot)." Is that correct?

Here's what I previously posted.
Sadly, an investor takes on much greater risk now with the equity plays noted in this post. But on dedicated bond funds vs a ST CD/TNote ladder, which investor would you rather be, one faithfully holding onto dedicated bond funds for the next couple of months/years, or an investor with a ST CD/TNotes ladder paying an FDIC'd/Full Faith'd 2% average APY?
So, no, I'm NOT suggesting investors NOT get into FFGCX at this point. I'm just suggesting that IMO (BTW, that and ten bucks gets you a Starbucks) an investor is taking on greater risk at this stage, implying that a LOT of the easy money has already been made.
That said, I happen to have (after a few changes to the deck chairs) marked the April 6 close as a date that I am tracking TRs of my funds for an interim look at current performance.
Coming into today, since April 6, FFGCX is UP 5.6% and FCPVX (another holding) is UP fractionally. NO OTHER MFs I own are UP during that (pretty rough) interim period.
If you want to have a current holding in your portfolio that you are reasonably sure will be UP virtually every day/week for the near-to-intermediate term, FFGCX (and the like) is a STRONG candidate, but understand (that I THINK at least) those gravy train tracks are getting closer and closer to the end of the line with each passing day.
In the meantime, it's been, and currently still is, one helluva ride.
Aside: On the other part of my excerpted post about dedicated bond funds vs a ST CD/TNote ladder, note that the sweet spot is NOT getting any sweeter in the past coupla days, so perhaps there is a shift in the markets happening/about to happen. We've deployed almost ALL of our SELL proceeds already, so not an issue for us. BUT, anyone wanting to go this route, oughta be looking into this strategy, like NOW!

@Old_Joe: I believe what you have written about the separation between news and opinion at the WSJ did in fact exist. I was a long-time reader until about two years ago. I had no quarrel with the investigative reporting (on Elizabeth Holmes and on avaiation, for example), but the formerly objective news coverage came to be slanted once 2016 came to pass. What I noticed in particular was the use of terms such as “left-leaning” to describe any politician not Republican as well how stories about DT’s rallies clearly expressed a favorable opinion of how the rabble was behaving on that particular day. Any news operation has to choose what events to cover; what I was doing was reading the NYTimes alongside the Journal. The Gray Lady had the facts, the WSJ presented poorly-disguised opinion pieces.

@chinfist, it is a free article from the WSJ so anyone should be able to read it. Anyway the article does elaborate more.
"Several million workers who dropped out of the U.S. workforce during the Covid-19 pandemic plan to stay out indefinitely because of persistent illness fears or physical impairments, potentially exacerbating the labor shortage for years, new research shows.
About three million workforce dropouts say they don’t plan to return to pre-Covid activities—whether that includes going to work, shopping in person or dining out—even after the pandemic ends, according to a monthly survey conducted over the past year by a team of researchers. The workforce dropouts tend to be women, lack a college degree and have worked in low-paying fields."

We also don't know how extensive Long Covid will turn out to be. CDC tracking isn't providing much help there. But it's possible it could be a significant labor force and overall economic drag ... of course not to mention a whole lot of people suffering the effects.

@yogibearbull,
I was looking at 5-Yr TIPS from the perspective of the breakeven inflation rate.
Except for the past few weeks, it appears this rate is the highest it's ever been (earliest data - 01/02/2003).
Per your comments, recent monthly CPI-U changes have been very high.
Holding 5-Yr TIPS for several months in this environment seems like a sensible strategy.
BTW, I've accumulated a good-sized position in I-Bonds over the years.
Thanks for your detailed response!

One other point of interest (at least to me): If you look at a bond fund like ABNDX, can find performance history back to 1975 on Yahoo Finance, it has never had two down years in a row. If we get a down year this year, then this will be the first time in 47 years that has happened. Looking at next year...will it be downside momentum, and an unprecedented third down year in a row, or reversion to the historical pattern? I still think there will be a rush to grab yield before long, but likely more pain until then, another bad day today.

"Survey shows many labor-force dropouts plan to maintain social distancing after pandemic, raising implications for economy"
Free link to WSJ Article
A few points from the article:

• The U.S. is still missing about 3.5 million workers... several million workers plan to stay out indefinitely
• About three million workforce dropouts say they don’t plan to return to pre-Covid activities—whether that includes going to work, shopping in person or dining out—even after the pandemic ends
• Consistently, 1 in 10 have said they plan no return.
• The labor force [may] be depressed for potentially years after the pandemic recedes

@Observant1, keep in mind the following.
1. As mentioned elsewhere, 5-yr TIPS now are 2nd best to I-Bonds. So, it for those who had their max fill for I-Bonds or who won't buy I-Bonds.
2. Individual TIPS do tap into month-over-month changes in CPI-U that is very high now and unsustainable: Jan +0.841%, Feb +0.913%, Mar +1.335%. Look at -0.54% real yield as monthly cost of 54 bps/12 = 4.5 bps only. BTW, I-Bonds tap into semi-annual change in CPI-U.
3. There is TIPS auction on this Thursday (4/21/22), so the time to act on it is short.
4. If the CPI-U growth slows down, as it must, sell TIPS or stick with them for 5 years (that may still turn out OK). As for what the current data are saying about inflation-expectations for 5 years, we will find that out in 5 years. But this idea here is to tap into the inflation wave for months, not years.

Summarizing some things I've posted recently...
We sold all of our dedicated bond funds earlier this year and kept small toeholds in NHMAX and RPHYX. Last Friday we sold the NHMAX toehold.
ALL of the dedicated bond funds we owned are DOWN a little-to-significantly this year. Dedicated bond fund proceeds were invested FFGCX and FNARX an the below-described ladder.
Bond proceeds from the more recent sales of allocation funds were/are being re-deployed into a relatively ST CDs/TNotes ladder (6 mos - 2-yrs, the latter being the sweet spot).
And now adding comments related to this thread...
There can be NO denying that this was the proper way to invest this year, and IMO for the coming months, maybe years.
For this year, who would you rather be, an investor faithfully hanging onto dedicated bond funds DOWN 1%-10-??%%, or an investor who saw opportunity and acted, currently holding FFGCX, UP ~35% YTD, having sold FNARX UP ~30% (at the time), and holding a ST CD/TNote ladder averaging ~2% APY?
BUYing an equity crash is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than BUYing a bond market crash because the reasons for the respective crashes are different and the prospects for recovery are different. No investor should look at them as the same or even similar.
And don't let easy excuses for investment decision failures and confirmation bias for those failures cloud your thinking.
Sadly, an investor takes on much greater risk now with the equity plays noted in this post. But on dedicated bond funds vs a ST CD/TNote ladder, which investor would you rather be, one faithfully holding onto dedicated bond funds for the next couple of months/years, or an investor with a ST CD/TNotes ladder paying an FDIC'd/Full Faith'd 2% average APY?

If you sold your bond funds before a 4 to 6 percent decline and bought your other funds before they moved higher than of course, fantastic timing. Making such a move over the past 10 years (maybe longer) when many talking heads were saying yields can only go higher would have been a very different story. I stick to my plan of mostly buying assets when out of favor. With bonds, as yields move higher so will returns (over time). No reason to bail, and especially in taxable accounts.

@stillers, If I understood your post correctly, I think you are not suggesting investors to now get into FFGCX. I think your only suggestion is to get into "ST CD/TNotes ladder (6 mos - 2-yrs, the latter being the sweet spot)." Is that correct?

......Because FFGCX has run-up too far, too fast, already? I'm late to the party, but I am now into TRP "New Era" fund. Natural Resources. PRNEX. And growing it. I don't see the Ukraine War ending soon. Inflation is not going away, either. In order of size in my portfolio:
1. Financials. I hope I'm just EARLY to THAT party!
2. Healthcare.
3. Tech/Cyclicals, same size.
4. Utilities.
5. Industrials.
.......Still growing the Nat. Res. piece.
Sold out of PRSNX over last Wed/Thurs. Great bond fund. But bonds are not the place to be. That was a pleasant rescue-job, knowing I was preserving profit which has built-up over the course of several years. I am sticking with my TRP Floating Rate PRFRX so far, YTD, hugging zero this year. I'm below 30% bonds now. Quite a reversal. The dividends feel good----- as long as the fund doesn't make a "deep southerly turn."
Happy Easter to all of you observing it. We spent our first night in our new digs last night. A world of difference for the better.

Summarizing some things I've posted recently...
We sold all of our dedicated bond funds earlier this year and kept small toeholds in NHMAX and RPHYX. Last Friday we sold the NHMAX toehold.
ALL of the dedicated bond funds we owned are DOWN a little-to-significantly this year. Dedicated bond fund proceeds were invested FFGCX and FNARX an the below-described ladder.
Bond proceeds from the more recent sales of allocation funds were/are being re-deployed into a relatively ST CDs/TNotes ladder (6 mos - 2-yrs, the latter being the sweet spot).
And now adding comments related to this thread...
There can be NO denying that this was the proper way to invest this year, and IMO for the coming months, maybe years.
For this year, who would you rather be, an investor faithfully hanging onto dedicated bond funds DOWN 1%-10-??%%, or an investor who saw opportunity and acted, currently holding FFGCX, UP ~35% YTD, having sold FNARX UP ~30% (at the time), and holding a ST CD/TNote ladder averaging ~2% APY?
BUYing an equity crash is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than BUYing a bond market crash because the reasons for the respective crashes are different and the prospects for recovery are different. No investor should look at them as the same or even similar.
And don't let easy excuses for investment decision failures and confirmation bias for those failures cloud your thinking.
Sadly, an investor takes on much greater risk now with the equity plays noted in this post. But on dedicated bond funds vs a ST CD/TNote ladder, which investor would you rather be, one faithfully holding onto dedicated bond funds for the next couple of months/years, or an investor with a ST CD/TNotes ladder paying an FDIC'd/Full Faith'd 2% average APY?

@hank,
Just to clarify, it’s not the amount of distributions from the MLP, it’s only the amount of UBTI that MLP produces. And some years, MLPs produce negative UBTI (or so I have heard from past holders in various investment boards). You may already know this, but it wasn’t clear from your second post. Apologies if you already knew it. Cheers!